HON’BLE MR. SUDEB MITRA, PRESIDING MEMBER 

Order No. 09

Date : 11.12.2024

Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order No. 8 dated 11.10.2023 passed in CC/64/2023 by the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suiri, by pronouncing which the Ld. Concerned DCDRC had not entertained the prayer of the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 i.e. the revisionist/petitioner of the instant Revision Petition, praying for vacating the exparte hearing of CC/64/2023, so passed by the Ld. DCDRC concerned, vide order No. 7 dated 25.08.2023 since in spite of being duly summoned in CC/64/2023, the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 i.e. the present revisionist had not filed written version in CC/64/2023 from it’s end within the statutorily fixed stipulated time for that purpose, the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 i.e. Regional Manager of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. has preferred the instant Revision Petition dated 12.12.2023 before this Commission, praying for setting aside the order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suiri in CC/64/2023.

    The grounds for agitating such prayer by the revisionist/petitioner in the instant Revision reflects, in gist, that the revisionist/petitioner of this Revision i.e. the OP No. 1 of the CC/64/2023, Regional Manager, New India Assurance Co. has contended that the impugned order dated 11.10.2023, passed in CC/64/2023, by the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suiri was passed without hearing the Revisionist/Petitioner i.e. the OP 1 of CC/64/2023 and without consideration of the fact that no opportunity even was given in CC/64/2023, to the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 to substantiate it’s stand point for rationalizing that such order is opposed to natural justice and not sustainable in the eye of law and exparte hearing of CC/64/2023 against the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 i.e. against the present revisionist/petitioner is legally inappreciable.

   Heard the Revisionist/Petitioner of this Revision Petition at length in respect of its filed Revision Petition. The sole OP of this Revision Petition i.e. the complainant of CC/64/2023 Dalia Majumdar had not turned up to contest in this Revision Petition, as the case record postulates.

Point for consideration

    In this backdrop, it is to be assessed and determined as to whether the instant Revision Petition filed by the Revisionist/Petitioner praying for setting aside the impugned order dated 11.10.2023, passed in CC/64/2023 deserves to be legally entertained and it is to be assessed on the other hand, as to whether the impugned order dated 11.10.2023, passed in CC/64/2023 on 11.10.2023 is legally sustainable or not.

Decision with reasons

Having regard to the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the Revisionist/Petitioner, and on scanning the available materials on record of CC/64/2023, it could be ascertained that the Revisionist/Petitioner being the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 was duly summoned in CC/64/2023 to appear and contest in CC/64/2023, but in spite of being duly summoned the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 on 12.072023, had not filed written version in CC/64/2023 from its end even on 25.08.2023 too and on 25.08.2023 the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 i.e. the Revisionist/Petitioner of this Revision Petition i.e. the Regional Manager, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. had prayed for time for filing written version in CC/64/2023, from it’s end.

    Consequently, in consonance with the scope of the judgement of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. VS Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 10941 – 10942 of 2013) & others pronounced by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the Ld. Concerned DCDRC, Birbhum Suir had disallowed the time prayer of the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023 for filing written version from it’s end in CC/64/2023 and vide order No. 7 dated 25.08.2023 of CC/64/2023 determined to run CC/64/2023 exparte against the OP 1 of CC/64/2023 i.e. the present Revisionist/Petitioner of RP/1/2024.

    It appears that against his particular order No. 7 dated 25.08.2023 passed in CC/64/2023 by the concerned Ld. DCDRC, the OP 1 of CC/64/2023 had not sought for any revision within the stipulated time span settled as per C.P. Act for that purpose and missing that scope, the OP No. 1 of CC/64/2023, attempted to take another scope to file Revision within stipulated statutory time by filing a fresh petition, seeking vacating the order of the Ld. DCDRC for exparte hearing of CC/64/2023 and on disposal of that petition of the Op No. 1 of CC/64/2023, the Ld. Concerned DCDRC by its order No. 8 dated 10.11.2023 upkept its findings, passed in CC/64/2023 vide order No. 7 dated 25.08.2023 by rationalizing that such particular order was passed in consonance with the scope of Sec. 68  of the C.P. Act of 2019, correctly.

    Having regard to the materials on record, contentions of the revisionist/petitioner and the findings of the order No. 7 dated 25.08.2023 and order No. 8 dated 11.10.2023 that fortified the order No. 7 dated 25.08.2023 of CC/64/2023 by the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suiri, I find that the impugned order No. 8 dated 11.10.2023 that was pronounced in consonance with the order No. 7 of 25.08.2023 both passed in CC/64/2023, deserves no interference and the same is legally appreciable as correct and is also found sustainable in the eye of law backed by the findings of the constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court of India in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. VS Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. dated 04.03.2020 and Diamond Exports and Another- Appellant VS United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Other – Respondent pronounced on 14.12.2021.

   Consequently, the impugned order No. 8 dated 11.10.2023 passed in CC/64/2023 by the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suiri deserves no interference as the same is legally appreciable and sustainable in true sense as per findings of the Hon’ble Apex Court of India, as referred just in the previous paragraph of this order.

    Accordingly, the instant Revision fails.

       Hence, it is

                                    ORDERED

    That the instant Revision Petition No. 1 of 2024 dated 12.12.2023 pressed by the Revisionist/Petitioner Regional Manager, the New India Assurance Col Ltd. is rejected on merit and is thus disposed of.

    Consequently, the impugned order dated 11.10.2023 passed in CC/64/2023 by the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suiri stands affirmed on merit.

    Resultantly the IA No. 06/2024 dated 16.01.2024 filed from the end of the Revisionist/Petitioner of this Revision Petition, seeking stay of operation of the order dated 11.10.2023 and 25.08.2023 passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suri in CC/64/2023, stand meritless and is found otise and is thereby vacated accordingly.

    Let a copy of this order along with the digitalized copy of the LCR of CC/64/2023 be sent down at once to the Ld. DCDRC, Birbhum, Suiri for information and to proceed further with the proceedings of CC/64/2023, according to law.

   Let free copy of this order be furnished to the contesting parties of this Revision Petition as early as practicable, according to the relevant rules and regulations of C.P. Act, as amended time to time uptill now.